Vide CIT v. Patel Proteins (P) Ltd. 2017 Tax Pub(DT) 1188 (Guj-HC)

393 ITR 274High Court2017#24940 most cited

judgments rely on this decision, according to BharatTax’s citation analysis of 292,668 Indian tax judgments — from 2023 to 2025.

Sections most often in play

Section 45(4)Section 143(3)Section 153A Section 292C Section 50D Section 69 Section 69A Section 69B

Issues it is cited on

section 143(3)

Judgments citing Vide CIT v. Patel Proteins (P) Ltd. 2017 Tax Pub(DT) 1188 (Guj-HC)

HEMANT NARESH AGARWAL,SURAT vs. ASSISTANT COMMISSIONER OF INCOME TAX, CENTRAL CIR. 4, SURAT

In the result, appeal of assessee is dismissed

ITA 170/SRT/2023[2020-21]Status: DisposedITAT Surat24 Oct 2025AY 2020-21

Bench: Shri Dinesh Mohan Sinha & Shri Bijayananda Prusethआ.(खो और ज).सं /It(Ss)A No.68 & 70/Srt/2023 Assessment Years: 2015-16 & 2018-19 (Physical Court Hearing) Deputy Commissioner Of Hemant Naresh Agarwal बनाम/ Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Vs. Surat Room No.508, 5Th Floor, Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Aayakar Bhawan, Majura Surat-395 010 Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) आयकर अपील सं./Ita.No.170/Srt/2023 Assessment Year: 2020-21 Hemant Naresh Agarwal Assistant Commissioner Of बनाम/ 701, Shree Shyam Awas, Bhatar Income-Tax, Central Circle-4, Vs. Road, Near Vidhya Bharti School, Surat, Aaykar Bhawan, Surat-395 010 Majura Gate, Surat-395 001 "थायीलेखासं./जीआइआरसं./Pan/Gir No: Auppa 9003 J (अपीलाथ"/Appellant) (""थ" /Respondent) िनधा"रती की ओर से /Assessee By Shri Kiran K. Shah राज" की ओर से /Revenue By Shri Mukesh Jain, Cit-Dr & Shri Kevin Langaliya, Ca सुनवाई की तारीख/Date Of Hearing 18/09/2025 उद्घोषणा की तारीख/Date Of Pronouncement 24/10/2025

Section 143(3)Section 250Section 292CSection 69

…dit facilities, no addition can be made if there appeared to be a difference between the stock shown in the books of account and the statement furnished to the banking authorities. – Vide CIT vs. Patel Proteins (P) Ltd. 2017 Tax Pub(DT) 1188 (Guj-HC) : (2017) 393 ITR 274 (Guj). c) Where the value of stock shown to bank for purpose of availing of higher credit facility was based on market rate and not at cost price but there was no difference in quantitative details, no addition under section 69B could be made, and was to be deleted. – Vide Pr. CIT vs. Gladder Ceramics Ltd. 2018 Tax Pub (DT) 463(Guj-HC) : (2018) 4…

THE ITO, WARD-3(1)(1),, AHMEDABAD vs. M/S POGGEN AMP NAGARSHETH POWERTRONICS PVT. LTD.,, AHMEDABAD

The appeal of the Revenue is dismissed

ITA 237/AHD/2018[2013-14]Status: DisposedITAT Ahmedabad13 Jun 2024AY 2013-14

Bench: Ms. Suchitra Kamble & Shri Makarand V. Mahadeokar, Accountnat Member Assessment Year : 2013-14 The Income Tax Officer M/S.Poggen Amp Nagarsheth Ward-3(1)(1) Vs Powertronics Pvt.Ltd. Ahmedabad C-1/B, 4402, Gidc Estage Phase-Iv, Vatva Ahmedabad – 382 445, Gujarat Pan: Aaacp 9130 B अपीलाथ"/ (Appellant) "" यथ"/ (Respondent) Assessee By : Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. & Shri Parimalsinh B. Parmar, Ar Revenue By : Shri Sudhendu Das, Cit-Dr सुनवाई क" तार"ख/Date Of Hearing : 10/06/2024 घोषणा क" तार"ख /Date Of Pronouncement: 13/06/2024 आदेश/O R D E R

For Appellant: Shri Tushar Hemani, Sr. Adv. &For Respondent: Shri Sudhendu Das, CIT-DR

Section 143(1)Section 143(3)Section 14A

…ions include: i. CIT vs. Riddhi Steel & Tube Pvt. Ltd. - 40 taxmann.com 177 (Guj). ITO vs. M/s.Poggen Amp Nagarsheth Powertronics Pvt.Ltd. Asst. Year : 2013-14 6 ii. CIT vs. Arrow Exim Pvt. Ltd. - 230 CTR 293 (Guj). iii. CIT vs. Patel Proteins Pvt. Ltd. - 393 ITR 274 (Guj). iv. CIT vs. Nangalia Impex - 54 taxmann.com 225 (Guj). v. CIT vs. Vrundavan Floor Mills - 72 taxmann.com 250 (Guj). The judgement relied upon by the Ld.DR deals with different facts. In the case of Suraj Bhan (Supra), the assessee could not explain the difference in the stock valuation. Also, no evidence was produced by the assessee of sa…

M/S KVR INFRA,MUMBAI vs. ACIT 30 (2) , MUMBAI

In the result, impugned order is set-aside and appeal of the assessee is allowed

ITA 323/MUM/2023[2011-12]Status: DisposedITAT Mumbai18 Aug 2023AY 2011-12

Bench: Shri Vikas Awasthy & Ms. Padmavathy Sआअसं. 323/मुं/2023 (िन.व. 2011-12) M/S Kvr Infra G-2, Room No.4, Shri Rani Sati Nagar Chsl, S.V. Road, Malad (West), Mumbai-400064. Pan: Aakfk3458Q ...... अपीलाथ" /Appellant बनाम Vs. Acit-30 (2), Mumbai. ..... "ितवादी/Respondent अपीलाथ" "ारा/ Appellant By : None (Written Submission Dt. 19.07.2023) "ितवादी "ारा/Respondent By : Sh. Prakash Kishinchandani, Sr. Dr सुनवाई की ितिथ/ Date Of Hearing : 07/08/2023 घोषणा की ितिथ/ Date Of Pronouncement : 18/08/2023 आदेश/ Order Per Vikas Awasthy, Jm This Appeal By The Assessee Is Directed Against The Order Of Commissioner Of Income Tax (Appeals), National Faceless Appeal Centre, Delhi (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Cit(A)’) Dated 27.12.2022, For The Assessment Year 2011-12. 2. The Solitary Issue Raised In Appeal Is Against Addition Of Rs. 50,24,875/- Made Under Section 69B Of The Income Tax Act, 1963 (Hereinafter Referred To As ‘The Act’)

For Appellant: None (written submission dt. 19.07.2023)For Respondent: Sh. Prakash Kishinchandani, Sr. DR

Section 143(3)Section 44ASection 69B

…contend that the AO could not show that assessee had made purchases out of undisclosed income, hence, addition under section 69B of the Act is unjustified. The assessee further placed reliance on the following decisions: (i) CIT Vs. Patel Proteins (P.) Ltd. [393 ITR 274 (Guj.)] (ii) CIT Vs. Vrundvan Roller Flourmills [72 taxmann.com 250 (Guj.)] (iii) Sri Chitta Ranjan Bara Vs. ITO [150 taxmann.com 277 (Calcutta)] To support his arguments that addition cannot be made under section 69B where inflated statement was furnished to the Bank for availing higher credit facility. 8. The assessee has inflated the cost of C…